The papers were cited anywhere from 39 to 276 times, according to Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science, with the top citation earner named a “highly cited paper,” meaning it was cited more than 99% of all other papers in its field published the same year.

By our count, Sarkar is now up to 33 retractions, at least a dozen corrections and one editor’s note. An investigation at Wayne State found that he had engaged in widespread misconduct, and recommended that 42 of his papers be retracted.

According to the retraction notices, the journal sent copies of all 12 to Sarkar’s last known email address, but he did not respond. In most cases, at least one of the other authors agreed with the retractions.

A search reveals that he was a remarkably well funded cancer researcher. Possibly the saddest aspect of this, and similar, stories is the lost opportunities. That is, for each grant 1) procured by misconduct and 2) that results in no valid advancements, there were, likely, legitimate projects that went unfunded. Think of the impact on current and future patients.

Another impact of grant fraud is the fact that there are, quite possibly, honest scientists whose proposals were passed over in favor of the “super-productive” types whose produce is/was fake. Some of those scientists could have failed to achieve tenure as a result, impacting them and their families profoundly.

Those found to have engaged in misconduct should face the same criminal and civil penalties as those engaging in other types of fraud.

That journal you link to has several hallmarks of a predatory open access journal. The address for the publisher is a residence, the phone number a non-fixed VoIP (meaning it can be associated with just about any desired address), and there’s no mention of any publication fee (but it is Open Access, so there will very likely be one).